Skip to main content
3:30 pm
you are going to have an item for motion people in motion so if you are going to have a new license on haight street summertime will be is going to be have a drink on there if you are going to the city by the day you are going to have a drink on haight street there ♪ supervisor chu: thank you. are there any other members of the public who wish to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have a motion? supervisor dufty: i make a motion to send the item forward with recommendations with the conditions established by the public. supervisor chu: thank you. there is a motion to send the
3:31 pm
item forward with recommendations. without objection. thank you very much, inspector. item six, please. >> items 6, or events amending the san francisco administrative code by amending section 21.40 to authorize the department of public health to contract for behavioral health services to children in foster care system under jurisdiction of the city and county of san francisco and located outside of san francisco, utilizing contracts -- contract language and form as mandated by the state of california under california welfare and institutions code under section 5777.7. supervisor chu: thank you very much. we have ann from the department of public health. >> thank you. the department is requesting that we use the state contract low of the city boilerplate, and this will put us in compliance with sb 785.
3:32 pm
this legislation, in regards to delivery of specialty mental health services for foster care children, and it mandates the use of standardized contracts statewide, so this would be for children that are placed out of county, and i have our director of children, youth, and families for the system of care for community behavioral health services. thank you. >> supervisors, this should give you an idea about the extent of the need. 534 children in foster care are facing -- are placed in san francisco. with the largest percentage placed in alameda county and san mateo counties. the reason they are placed in those counties is because half of them are placed with
3:33 pm
relatives, and the remaining in foster homes. they all actually have a right and need to access and services when they have the need. right now, it is not easy to enter contracts for services with them, so the change is to create more timing access for the children living with relatives outside of san francisco. supervisor chu: could you explain a little but why you think the california state code would be better than using our san francisco code? what is it that we would be changing? >> it is the contract thing language that all counties are expected to comply with, and also a sense of time line in terms of authorization timeline and also a timeline for setting up payment schedules so that it
3:34 pm
has statewide application. supervisor chu: from a statewide perspective and the use of those funds, is it a requirement of san francisco? >> it is in our contract with the state department of health services. supervisor chu: are there any members of the public who wish to speak on item 6? seeing none, public comment is closed. questions from the committee? we have a motion to approve and send this item forward with recommendation. thank you very much. madam clerk, are there any other items before us? >> no, madam chair. supervisor chu: thank you. we are adjourned.
3:35 pm
>> i work with the department of environment and we are recycling oil. thank you. we can go into a refinery and we can use it again. they do oil changes and sell it
3:36 pm
anyway, so now they know when a ticket to a. hal>> to you have something you want to get rid of? >> why throw it away when you can reuse it? >> it can be filtered out and used for other products. >> [speaking spanish] >> it is going to be a good thing for us to take used motor oil from customers. we have a 75-gallon tank that we used and we have someone take it from here to recycle.
3:37 pm
>> so far, we have 35 people. we have collected 78 gallons, if not more. these are other locations that you can go. it is absolutely free. you just need to have the location open. you are set to go.
3:38 pm
3:39 pm
3:40 pm
3:41 pm
3:42 pm
3:43 pm
3:44 pm
3:45 pm
3:46 pm
3:47 pm
3:48 pm
3:49 pm
3:50 pm
>> pursuant to the law that supervisor mar mentioned, specifying findings recommendations, and in this case, the board of supervisors is required to respond to all recommendations except for two, f1 and f2 that have to do with the employee retirement system board. the draft of the response resolution that is before you is merely a template. it does not include anything indicating disagreement or agreement that during this hearing and after the hearing, i'll be working with the clerk's office to fill in the blanks, and we will be forwarding the completed resolution and i will also be available to answer any questions.
3:51 pm
supervisor mar: before we open this up for public comment, i want to ask the department heads that are here, and there are a number of them, briefly give a kind of verbal response to the grand jury's findings specific to their department. i know first we have someone from the comptroller -- controller's office. >> i am from the mayor's budget office. sometimes we overlap quite a bit. a couple of quick remarks, and the department chair can come up and walk through the recommendations. first of all, i would like to commend the members of the grand jury for continuing to join in this discussion about pension
3:52 pm
and benefits reform that we have been having in this city and in these chambers over the last several years. surely, we agree that this is a serious issue. in san francisco, just like every other local and state governments around the country, we have been experiencing growth and benefit costs, health care, retiree health, and that has been the subject of much discussion among all of us. i do certainly acknowledge the importance of this issue. as these costs grow, less money is available for the things that we want to do in this city, provide health care, public safety, fill potholes, and we need to continue to be proactive about how we address the growth
3:53 pm
in these costs. one thing i do want to point out that i think is important, despite the challenges we face with the growth and these costs, despite the issues pointed to in the report, there are some really important things that the city and county of san francisco has done to address these issues. while we have continuing challenges, it is worth pointing out that there are some things that we have done that put us ahead of the curve on addressing these issues. just last june, the voters approved proposition d, a pension reform charter amendment that was put in front of them by the board of supervisors. it was put together in collaboration with labor, the mayor, the board of supervisors, and other stakeholders. i think that was a significant
3:54 pm
step. on other benefit cost growth issues, the city of san francisco has been a leader in health costs. we put to the san francisco voters a measure that helps us begin to fund our liabilities for other post employment benefits. that was led by a number of individuals in this room, a especially supervisor elsbernd. that is an example of where we have gotten ahead of other cities and we have been proactive about addressing benefits. one of the things i like to point out, and this report, the person reading it might give the impression that our retirement system is not doing well. to the contrary, it is one of the better funded and the best managed retirement systems in the country. i just want to put that out there as context while we walk
3:55 pm
through these responses. while we do have some challenges ahead of us, it is important to a knowledge that we are doing something very well and we're continuing to work on these issues. lastly, i think we have a lot to do on these issues, but i think there are a number of recommendations in this report that have either a factual legal, or feasibility issue associated with recommendations. we have some concerns about the wisdom and the city's ability to comply with those recommendations. supervisor chu: this is not so much a question for the mayor's office, i am more just wondering, the report that we had before that was pretty lengthy with a number of
3:56 pm
recommendations, we're responding to this because it is our obligation to make sure that we respond to the request for the board to respond, and it is generally very important subject matter for us. will we be able to go through some of the specific findings and have the department's response to those items in particular? it will help us in drafting our own responses and will better help us understand specific things in the report. will that be ok? their findings to think people disagree with because the state of the fact that our pensions are guaranteed by city charter or federal state provisions, those are not the ones i am interested in talking about. the other ones that are substantial, i like to share their thoughts about the responses. i was thinking we might be able
3:57 pm
to get on finding a-1. the finding is from the grand jury report, san francisco's retirement benefits are financially unstable without significant cutbacks in jobs and city services. i know the departments have a response, so i'm wondering if they would be able to respond to that finding in particular. good afternoon, supervisors. finding a-1 is not one that we specifically responded to. we do have responses on some of the other items.
3:58 pm
>> supervisors, and in particular, supervisor chu, with a-1, the san francisco retirement system is one of the best funded plans in the system. we are funded at 97%, due in credit to the elected officials of the city through the years have never failed to make a contribution. we are also recognized nationally as a very solidly funded plan. the plan is here, and the fact that we are perhaps being combined with other funds in the country that are seriously underfunded is the perception i
3:59 pm
think that is bring brought to bear that does not apply to our system. supervisor chu: does the controller's office have anything about the finding? >> not on that particular finding. we have seen a it summarized well. the overall financial management perspective is a very important one. this finding in particular, you have seen the response that we are among the best funded pension plans in the country. we can respond as we go along to specific findings about how the city has addressed with the financial management approaches have been. i am ready to do that on a number of them. supervisor maxwell: